It was generally David Silva who was playing on City’s right, and he moved inside throughout the opening period and allowed Baines forward. As with Newcastle’s goal at Eastlands earlier this season, City were then vulnerable down that side and Baines’ cross (eventually) resulted in the first goal, before he started and finished an excellent move to make it 2-0. (The second goal, it should also be noted, was whilst right-back Pablo Zabaleta was off the pitch, and Milner was filling in.)

City sit back

Despite the fact they’d prospered by taking the game to City, Moyes suddenly decided to go for an all-out-defence approach after just twenty minutes of the game. The main consequence of this was Anichebe’s new role – rather than staying high up the pitch against the City centre-backs, he was given the responsibility of defending Everton’s left flank, which basically involved tracking Pablo Zabaleta up and down the line. Leon Osman therefore moved inside into a central position, and Marouane Fellaini played deeper, infront of the defence.

On the opposite flanks, Balotelli moved upfront alongside Carlos Tevez when City got the ball, meaning Phil Neville tracked him inside and became something like a third centre-back. In turn, Seamus Coleman dropped deeper and formed what look like a back five at times.

Still, Everton remained quite narrow, which was unquestionably the right approach considering that Tevez, Silva and Balotelli were all looking to move into a similar, central position on the edge of the box. Everton made it difficult to play through that zone and City were forced to move the ball wide – crossing is not something City do well, and they didn’t complete a cross in the opening 45 minutes. Instead, they shot a lot, especially from long distance – Everton made an extraordinary number of blocks:

The problem with playing Anichebe as a makeshift left-winger was obvious – Everton didn’t have an outlet upfront. They looked like 4-1-4-1-0 when they didn’t have the ball – Cahill became the furthest man forward, but whilst he has an impressive leap, he lacks hold up ability or pace in behind, and so City kept winning the ball back, having 90% of possession at one point in the game.

Changes

At half-time Moyes changed things – Anichebe stopped dropping back to the wing, and Cahill moved into that position more. Mancini also make a switch, introducing Adam Johnson for Milner, with Yaya Toure moving deeper.

Soon after, Anichebe was sent off for two late challenges in a short space of time. He is still returning from injury – he’d played just 85 minutes so far this season before this match, and he hasn’t completed a Premier League game for nearly two years. His fitness levels were clearly suffering, especially since he had to play such an energetic role. His bookings were both the result of being too slow into challenges – Moyes had been planning to substitute him just before his red card.

Substitutions

The overall pattern of the game changed little – City dominated – but Everton’s problem with no outlet upfront was even more exaggerated. Moyes then made a brave but effective change – Coleman came off, Saha came on upfront, with Cahill dropping into midfield and Jack Rodwell playing rightish. Saha provided a focal point for Everton when they won the ball, and meant Everton could relieve the pressure slightly. Tony Hibbert on for Phil Jagielka was an even more surprising change (even if taking into consideration that Jagielka had just scored an own goal) but Hibbert managed to make two important blocks, one of which may have been with his hand.

Mancini was reluctant to make changes. Jo was introduced late on, but only when Balotelli was injured. Shaun Wright-Phillips or even Micah Richards could have been used to give some pace in wide areas; all four of Gareth Barry, Yaya Toure (in a deep role), Kolo Toure and Vincent Kompany probably weren’t needed in a must-score situation.

Conclusion

A good victory for David Moyes. Everton outplayed City in the opening quarter of the game, and whilst they probably sat back too much for the remainder, they defended well in the penalty box. Not only did Moyes get his tactics from the outset right, he also made better use of his bench.

Based upon the balance of play, City were hard done by – but they didn’t create many clear-cut chances, and the only time they got the ball in the net was from a deflection. Tevez, in particular, had a very quiet game and others are not yet ready to step up – but perhaps the problem here was in the Tevez-dominated preparation to the game, rather than the tactics on it.

City is no contender. And Mancini is no winner –if Mourinho is given these players at his disposal, he would have won the EPL easily.

Falahk on December 21, 2010 at 4:17 am

keep in mind that we are speaking about a guy who won the Coppa Italia with two cash strapped teams (Fiorentina and Lazio), and built Inter, a team with no domestic title in 15 years, into a contender that then proceded to win 3 league titles in a row

if anything, Mancini is clearly a winner

he got a team to gel (lots of new players), and those things take time, a champions league spot would be a good enough this year along with a decent showing in europa league, while more should be expected next year

its still way to early to write of City and Mancini I would say ^^

James on December 21, 2010 at 5:10 am

There’s something obviously missing in City, psychologically. When they play Chelsea, you see how they should always play. The intensity, the thirst to down the champions or Terry’s team, it’s just not there.

Remember the 4-3 against United? It was a loss, but they played like they wanted to win and only lost it in super-extra-added time. The last derby was so calculated and careful, too careful to the point that they didn’t care about winning it.

There were too many wrong decisions against Everton, throw-ins, corners, soft bookings, yet they still won.

Josef on December 21, 2010 at 2:50 pm

This is what I have observed. City just does not appear to have the right kind of instinct. I saw good flashes when they were down to 10 men against Arsenal, but it seems like in a lot of their games they are not stepping on the necks of their opponents.

“…and built Inter, a team with no domestic title in 15 years, into a contender that then proceded to win 3 league titles in a row.”

1. Sir Alex Ferguson brought Manchester United, a team with no domestic title in 26 years, into contender.
2. Mourinho brought Chelsea, a team with no domestic title in more than 50 years, into contender (in his first year).

Oh and moreover, do you forget that the real Milan and Juventus didn’t ‘exist’ when Mancini won the league titles with Inter?

I’m no hater of Mancini. But considering the money he spent and the players he has in his current squad, I merely think that City’s position in the league table is, without doubt, an underachievement. City deserves a better manager -and Mancini, in my opinion, is definitely no world class.

Josef on December 21, 2010 at 2:47 pm

ok, so how many “world class” managers are there? you only specify two, both of whom happen (with the exception of Porto, who were no paupers and only appear “cash-strapped” compared to teams like Chelsea) to have coached extremely affluent teams stocked with excellent players. Even if we credit them both as world class, they can only manage one team at a time, so saying “oh well Mancini isn’t as good as Mourinho and City deserve better” isn’t very constructive.

Who I’d hire, if I was a sheik? Bielsa. No doubt.

Falahk on December 21, 2010 at 11:18 pm

im not saying Mancini is a better manager then sir Alex or Mourinho, when did it claim that was the case? when did I compare him to anyone in terms of ability? (both sir Alex and Mourinho are surly better managers)

sir Alex was apointed United manager november 86, he did not win the league until 93, more then 6 years later

Claudio Ranieri built Chelsea into a contender (6th, 6th, 4th befor the arrival of Abramovich, and 2nd after the takeover), Mourinho just picked up where he left of and won

a Milan team that won champions league 2007 was no proper contender? a Roma team playing some of the best football in ages was no contender? Inter won the league by 22 points that year (the calciopoli point deductions did not affect the outcome here since Roma would still have been runner up), and also wining 17 games in a row, 6 more wins the the former league record

the Fiorentian team he managed went bankrupt a year after wining the metioned cup, and the team was forced to sell key players prior to his arrival(Batistuta and Rui Costa would prolly be the most notable), at Lazio both Nesta and Crespo had to be offloaded, and players had to take big time pay cuts

so yes both those cup wins was suprising achivments

just get some grip, Mancini have only been in charge 1 year (and only 6 months whit “his” squad), expecting more then a CL spot this year with the current competition would be both foolish and shortsighted

Nazone on December 21, 2010 at 5:50 am

A league title because of Calciopoli.. I would not count it.

Falahk on December 21, 2010 at 11:31 pm

really depends on how one define it, can a team that fix matches be called a winner? who would you apoint as winner of the Calciopoli session?

IMO nobody should have had that title, but it was officialy handed to Inter so it have to be counted

malcolm on December 22, 2010 at 6:51 am

agree. i would not count it either lol

juliano on December 22, 2010 at 1:54 pm

he had 2 “real” trophies also, not just the calciopoli

Josef on December 21, 2010 at 2:48 pm

I know everyone loves to fellate the special one, but really, this kind of counter-factual assertion is nothing but speculation.

Great review ZM. As an Everton fan at tonight’s game I must say I was happy for the final whistle to arrive when it did. City had a lot of the ball and lots of chances, 34 in total but Tim Howard was only forced into 5 saves. It was a remarkably similar game to the corresponding fixture last term, City having all the play with us forcing them out wide leading to a lot of unsuccessful crosses and us making the most of our chances. It was the opposite to a lot of our games this campaign where usually we have enjoyed more shots and possession than opponents yet lost out due to a lack of penetration. I think Fellaini was key tonight, 100% tackle completion and great protection for our back four.

myopic_lemur on December 21, 2010 at 11:51 am

Fellaini was superb. That is all.

matt on December 21, 2010 at 3:24 am

I’m at a loss to say why Silva doesn’t play as a central winger (like he did in Valencia, when he played his best). They can play a Madridesque shape, with Tevez like Higuain, Balotelli in the Ronaldo role, Silva playing like Ozil, and new signing X playing in a deeper right sided role. Man City’s more defensive players would have a different playing style, but they need another attacking presence to unlock a stubborn defense.

Josef on December 21, 2010 at 3:04 pm

“new signing X playing in a deeper right sided role.”

Don’t they already have Milner? Johnson? Wright-Phillips? They don’t need new signings to make this switch, just for the manager to take his head out form where the sun don’t shine tactically.

JediRage on December 21, 2010 at 4:59 am

I wonder how ‘tactically stimulating’ city’s games actually are?

David on December 21, 2010 at 10:25 am

Well…. using three defensive midfielders at the same time? Probably no one else in the Europe does it.

Nazone on December 21, 2010 at 10:45 am

I remember seeing Gattuso, Ambrosini, Flamini on the field at the same time.
Was Milan playing with 3 defensive midfielders?

Iden on December 21, 2010 at 4:16 pm

I find this idea, popular in the British sporting media, that City play with 3 defensive midfielders to be complete rubbish. If you watch them play it is quite clear that Yaya Toure is positioned in an advanced role ahead of De Jong and Barry.

5 mins of google research will tell you (or those lazy journalists/pundits) that Yaya Toure has always played in this position for Ivory Coast.

Only at Barcelona would a player with the creative talents of Yaya end up as the most defensive player in midfield.

To be fair, Yaya does have the physique of an archetypal defensive midfielder but this does not excuse the laziness which leads to this incorrect classification.

derekdigby on December 21, 2010 at 10:39 pm

every time i’ve seen City play this season Yaya Toure has clearly been more advanced than the other two midfielders. and yet every time the commentators/pundits seem surprised to see him there.

pc on December 22, 2010 at 11:27 am

Spot on about Yaya Toure, Iden. It drives me nuts too. The heat maps are clear, but apparently the British sporting media (do we include ZM in this lot now too? lol) are beneath such base research.

The only place he ever played DM was at Barcelona, and even the Cules will tell you he had more to offer than that.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this is based solely on a couple of observations from Barcelona’s CL matches against English opposition.

rahul on December 21, 2010 at 5:00 am

i cannot imagine how leighton baines cannot be in england squad while he is one of the most consistent performers . looking at the last night’s game man city may had the possession and some what penetration but there was a lack of pivot who could dictate the play in the box and provide that aerial threat and test jagielka and distin . balotelli didnt seem to listen to mancini who seem to want him to play in the middle a more orthodox english forward role . city were defeated not because they played badly but because they took everton lightly first and by the time they took everton seriously the damage was done . mancini should seriously consider playing adebayor or start training balotelli to play like a pivot where on the can just hold the ball and play silva and tevez and himself can turn or else there is nothing wrong with team which can be good and can be genuine title contenders . stop playing milner he is idiot and he is right about johnson spends too much on the ball where on he can play other and can be much more dangerous with his movement rather than trying to dribble the whole team .

There is no denying the quality of Cole, but Warnock? Baines is the second best full back in the country hands down, so its a mystery why he isnt even making the squad.

Elwood on December 21, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Baines did not play well in the few matches for England, but I’ll put that down largely to nerves. He definitely deserves a second chance.

The Goat on December 26, 2010 at 12:24 pm

Baines is a quality left back in the week in week out hoopla of the Premier League, however, he does seem to be one of those rabbit in the headlights type of players when making the step up to international level (see also Ashley Young, Jordan Henderson, et al). There were also rumours about him being terribly homesick when he was with the England squad prior to the World Cup this summer. He’s basically flakey and doesn’t have the mental fortitude to cut it at the top level. A real shame, but that’s just the way some people are put together.

JediRage on December 21, 2010 at 11:13 am

nvm

Josef on December 21, 2010 at 3:00 pm

This “best left back in the world” junk is such English parochialism. Fabio Coentrao, people. I’d maybe even rather have Capdevila.

luke on December 21, 2010 at 5:36 pm

Ashley Cole has been better than Coentrao is now for pretty much a decade.

Falahk on December 21, 2010 at 11:37 pm

last session Riise was the best left back, no contest, but injury trubles have made for an inconsistant start of this session

Patrick on December 21, 2010 at 5:19 am

Thought that the substitutions for City were slightly bizarre. Agreed wholeheartedly with Adam Johnson coming on at half time and thought he made an impact, but thought the game was calling out for another attacking fullback. Kolarov was getting around the left and getting crosses in but especially with alot of City’s attackers being so narrow, and with Everton having nothing upfront there was no need to even have that many players back. Saha made a bit of a difference at the end but i think City could have coped easily with Toure and Kompany staying as two centre backs, having gareth barry screen in front of those two and send both fullbacks. Zabaleta is a steady possession style fullback but the introduction of Richards or even SWP to play a higher overlapping fullback to attack with pace to get around and/or behind the defence might have caused Everton some more problems.

charlie_m on December 21, 2010 at 10:08 am

If Everton’s second goal had been scored by Arsenal, for example, we’d read a lot more about it. A fifteen pass movement leading to a deft curled finish – a cracking goal.

Enloe on December 24, 2010 at 7:04 pm

Never really got the point of saying the “If this goal had been scored by Arsenal, then…” malarkey. You’re talking about it, aren’t you? And how many superb Arsenal team goals are mentioned come the end of the season? Not many.

The most-talked-about team goal this season was scored by Bolton anyway.

I think the main point here is that Mancini got his setup for this match wrong from the outset. Given how well Leighton Baines has played from full back this season in terms of the attacking threat he provides, putting David Silva nominally on the right wing wasn’t a great move – you need someone who’s going to pin him back and give him something to think about. In the first half Baines got up and down the left very impressively, completing 25 out of the 35 passes he attempted, a lot of them around the halfway life. In the 2nd half, after the introduction of Adam Johnson who stayed on the right hand side, it was 6 out of 11 (and 4 of those were throw ins.) Whilst I’m aware that because of the type of player Johnson is he poses a significant threat from the bench, starting him here surely made more sense given the way Everton play?

Now I know Nigel de Jong was out but surely playing Barry and Toure as the pivot, Silva in the role Toure played (although maybe more as a pure trequartista) with Johnson right, Balotelli (although frustratiing – it’s him or Milner) and Tevez in the centre made more sense. Given Silva’s natural inclination to play in the middle, playing him nominally on the right made an already congested centre of the pitch even more so and, as ZM mentioned in the article, gave City a need to play wide a bit more frequently – and Johnson would’ve been able to provide that width.

what about a narrow formation for city (4-3-1-2 with silva being “the one”)? mancini loved it in inter, but putting that in the premier league is tough…

Jundy14 on December 22, 2010 at 2:18 pm

playing a narrow 4-3-1-2 in the English premier league is just asking for trouble. With such a vast number of teams in the league using 4-4-2’s and 4-2-3-1’s whilst using as much width as possible when attacking, the 4-3-1-2 would constantly be vulnerable in wide areas particularly from full backs.

Interesting to see how it would pan out though, no doubt the numerical advantage in the centre would come into play but even a 4-4-2 can be so compact that it is no longer an issue (Newcastle this season for example).

If I were managing Man City (Imagining it now!) I would keep this set up that he has at the moment to play against the bigger teams but against the weaker teams I would ditch the set up and go with a similar system to Barcelona’s.

*Barry and Yaya I wasn’t sure about, but seeing as Yaya had already played the role with Barca he’d fit straight in. Barry is an excellent player but it sure would be interesting seeing him play something of an inesta type role! (Milner an option in this role, but I’d rather see vision and passing ability than energy and work rate here, not to say milner cant be creative of course!)
*Tevez false 9.. of course.
*SRP has the pace to get in behind and playing close to Silva and Tevez it would be sure to happen often, could also have Balotelli in here as well.
*Adebayour to play the Villa role.. kick goals! Not as much toe, but with an aerial presence perfect for the runs from Richards.
*Ballotelli an option instead of Adebayour also.

What do you think ZM? an option or not the personel to pull it off?

JohnGm on December 25, 2010 at 6:52 pm

What works in one game for one team will probably not work in a different game with a different team.

Why tactic would proably fail if manchester city aplied it to this game.

1) Lets say anchibe(excuse my spelling)followed richards. you would have 1 st(cahill) vs 3 defenders. cahill drops back like a false 9 at times so at some points in the game you would have 3 defenders left with nothing to do.

2)That tactic was successful because Espanyol was pressing, on a big pitch, with a high line, their players(mainly cb) got pulled out of position leaving space in behind for pedro and villa to exploit.

3).If applied to this game.
If tevez played the false 9 it wouldnt draw of evertons defenders out of position.
(They are sitting back, not pressing, and its not like they’re man marking tevez)
No body would follow tevez theyd just let him drift into mid field where he wouldnt be a threat.

4.)SRP would be useless
The only thing he has is pace and with everton defending so deeply that becomes nuetrailised right away.
Since everton are defending so deep there would be no space for him to pull any bit of magic of(he already lacks technical ablity. if u deny him space well… his influence would be severly limited) Its not like hes messi who can do anything with an inch or 2 of space.

5).Which would basically leave you with adeybayor as your only threat up against
evertons defenders down the left(and with his work rate hmmm…. i wonder how he would cope.

6. If you really are going to use a tactic similar to barcas that means u have a majority of ur players on one side. trying to isolate a specific area.
Not gonna work for a team that is sitting back with 8 players. In theory if u attk dwn the left. everton would just compress the left more and ud be stuck with a 5 vs 3 situation.
3 cbs up against SRP and adeybayor
2 dms up against tevez.
i wonder who will win.(no sarcasim intended. just stating the obvious)

As for the mid field.
well u would need to put silva on the left instead of barry because adeybayor isnt going to give u width dwn the left. and kolarav(if ur using barcas system has to stay back to guard cahill.(in theory cahill wont be in tht position half the time due to the fact he isnt really comfoterable playing that high)

Modifiying barca’s tactic for this everton game

Attacking
It would also make more sense to push tevez fw as a stricker play on the left creating at least a 3 v 3 down match up on the left hand side. And if Kolarav and richards really pushed foward into the “alves role” you could create a 5 v 5 situation at the back for everton. Plus have complete width
Mid field

Silva would need to be switched to the left hand side to supply passes to the front 3 on the left.

barry or a (right footed passer would be better down the right.that way would be able to spread the ball the ball would be spread down the right easier. Also (The fact that barry sits back woul encourage richards to push foward down the right hand side, and give you width) If you put silva on the right hed push, foward cut inside, leave you with no width, and wouldnt pass to richards. (which would leave richards with nothing to do on the right)

Defensively your fine
just as long as you have 2 cbs and a defensive mid you will be able to control cahill.
If cahill drops back the dm will cover him.
If cahill press the cbs u will have a 2v 1 advantage.
(note u dont have to worry about anchiebe hes tryna control richards)
And you are always left with 2 people to distrubute the ball deep in the center midfield.
Summary
Their would be even distribution
silva distrubuting down left
barry distrubuting down the right.
the dm or cb distrubuting deep middle

Full width
with kalorov and richards in the alves role

You have completely overloaded evertons defensive line. which will make it tough for them to defend or even distrubute the ball properly themselves.

Example of the team you should play
—————–Hart—————–
———-Toure—-Kompany—
—————––Yaya—————–
Richards—-Barry———————Kolorov
———————————
——————–——-Silva————-
———————————–
—————SRP—Tevez—Adebayour—–

I could go into the instructions but im afraid tht there wont be enough space on this post
So yeah thats how i think u could adapt barcas tactic to this game. You cant just pick a someone elses tactic and just use it. You have to modify it to the game and your players. (sorry this post was so long)

JohnGm on December 25, 2010 at 6:53 pm

what do u think? about this idea

dearieme on December 21, 2010 at 6:47 pm

Can anyone tell me how “% possession” is defined? Is it just the percentage of the time that the team in question has control of the ball?

Not realley: Its not the Time, its the Number of Contacts added up and expressed in Percentage.

Mikey on December 23, 2010 at 9:38 am

Conversely, how does the Italian ratio description of possession work?

dearieme on December 22, 2010 at 12:14 am

Thanks

pc on December 22, 2010 at 10:48 am

Fine choice of chalkboard with the blocks ZM. They really did get in the way of an awful lot of balls. To that you can add 21 interceptions (their highest of the season), 15 in their own half.

City still struggling at fullback despite the addition of Kolarov and Boateng. With Everton sitting tight just outside their own penatly area, City needed to change the point of attack rapidly in the hope of opening up some gaps, but they could not manage it. Johnson’s introduction gave them a more persistent threat on the right, but by the time the ball arrived Everton had double cover on him every time I think. And even if you do manage to get something in from wide, Tevez is not really your man in that situation.

Hi mate, nice blog…really! I’m the admin of Stadio Goal, a blog of soccer similar to yours….i would like to make a link exchange….do you? Let me know if you are interested in it…have a good day and happy christmas

It’s funny. City has money, and all but when I just look to line-up, unless to me, I think that is something else that just isn’t there. They have a good midifield, good forwards but there’s no “Maestro”, to play with the 10 and organizate the team.
What surprises me it’s that: money can’t make a team turn into one of the best in Europe without some years working and working.